Discussion Digest, Vol 84, Issue 4

[Michel Galle]

Le 4 déc. 2009 à 12:00, discussion-request at fsfeurope.org a écrit :

> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:19:11 +0100
> From: Theo Schmidt <theo.schmidt at wilhelmtux.ch>
> Subject: Re: Raymond, climate
> Cc: discussion at fsfeurope.org
> Message-ID: <4B18E21F.50002 at wilhelmtux.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
> 
> 
> 
> And there is one last locigal point: if climate warming is just a lot of hot air 
> (sorry, can't resist :-) ) and turns out to be wrong or exagerated, there is no 
> harm done by the actions required to stave off the worst effects, on the 
> contrary. But if we believe the sceptics like Raymond and continue in the same 
> way as today, a lot of harm is done if *they* are wrong. They are therefore 
> playing a dangerous game with other peoples lives as stakes. Therefore common 
> decency demands that we behave in a manner appropriate to minimising global 
> warming, even if we are ourselves sceptics.

I prefer to be wrong and improve the world,  than to be right and harm the world.   I don't care if whatever climate stuff is true :  I do not want to pollute, destroy, harm the world anyway.


Science is like Opensource, you can discuss it, scrutinize it, analyze it. Science is an open methodology.  if it's closed, it's not Science.